SCREEN-L Archives

September 1995, Week 2

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Matthew Mah <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 11 Sep 1995 10:27:45 -0500
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
 > The camera cannot be non-biased, because it's operated by a human
 > being.
 > Not only does this create bias, but the cenamatographer is directed
 > to
 > shoot in a biased way.  Throw in the lighting persons ability to
 > subtly
 > influence the way a sceen/actor comes across, and you've got a very
 > biased, if not schizophrenic, "narrator", don't you?
 
That's a very good point, and I agree with you up to a point, but we have to
remember that cinematography (i.e. film stock, lighting, etc.) is just he
aesthetic feel of a film.  Get right down to it, a film in it's barebones is
just dialogue with movement.  Look at that, and then we can make proper
judgements on whether or not it is biased.
 
Matthew
<[log in to unmask]>
 
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2